Washington Unit DECISION ON APPEAL

Transcription

1 Citibank (South Dakota), N.A. v. Vermont Department of Taxes, No Wncv (Teachout, J., June 30, 2015) [The text of this Vermont trial court opinion is unofficial. It has been reformatted from the original. The accuracy of the text and the accompanying data included in the Vermont trial court opinion database is not guaranteed.] STATE OF VERMONT SUPERIOR COURT Washington Unit CIVIL DIVISION CITIBANK (SOUTH DAKOTA), N.A. Appellant Docket No Wncv v. VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF TAXES Appellee SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO. Appellant Docket No Wncv v. VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF TAXES Appellee DECISION ON APPEAL Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., (Citibank) and Sears, Roebuck and Co. (Sears) appeal from determinations of the Commissioner of the Vermont Department of Taxes denying them the benefit of an exclusion from the sales tax related to bad debts. 1 In concert with Vermont retailers, such as Sears, Citibank issues private label credit cards to consumers who use them to finance purchases from the respective retailer. Some of those consumers default on their accounts with Citibank with respect to sales on which the underlying retailer already collected and paid the Vermont sales tax. Citibank and Sears claim that bad debt of that sort entitles each of them to the bad debt exclusion from the Vermont sales tax, 32 V.S.A The exclusion is available if the person who was required to pay the sales tax later writes off the sale as worthless debt. In these cases, Sears and similarly situated retailers were required to pay the sales tax on purchases charged to private label credit cards (cards with the retailer store name on them) issued to customers by Citibank. For customers who failed to pay the Citibank credit card account balance on which such purchase was charged, any related bad debt could be treated as a bad debt 1 These are separate cases that have not been consolidated pursuant to Rule 42. Because the disposition of each case depends almost entirely on the identical legal issue, the court is jointly deciding these cases in the interest of efficiency. The parties are cautioned to avoid joint filings so long as the cases are not formally consolidated.

2 under the Internal Revenue Code. Appellants in each of these cases subsequently sought the benefit of the sales tax exclusion described above in proceedings with the Vermont Department of Taxes (Citibank applied for a refund and Sears requested a deduction during an audit.)the Commissioner ruled that the exclusion does not apply to either entity in these circumstances. The exclusion Since 1969, the Commissioner of the Department of Taxes has been authorized by statute to exclude from the sales tax those sales that result in bad debts or are cancelled: The Commissioner may provide by regulation for the exclusion from taxable receipts, amusement charges of amounts representing sales where the contract of sale has been cancelled, the property returned on the receipt or charge has been ascertained to be uncollectable or, in the case the tax has been paid upon that receipt or charge, for refund or credit of the tax so paid. 32 V.S.A Originally, the Department provided by regulation as follows: Where the vendor or person required to collect tax is unable to collect accounts receivable in connection with which he has already remitted the tax to the Commissioner, he may apply for a refund or credit within two years of the date the accounts were actually charged off on his books and records. Citibank Determination 6 (quoting Regulation ). In 2007, the original regulation was replaced, in part, with the following: A. Where the seller or person required to collect tax is unable to collect accounts receivable in connection with which he or she has already remitted the tax to the commissioner, that person or seller may apply to the commissioner for a refund or credit. Bad debt shall be defined as in Section 166 of the Internal Revenue Code. 26 U.S.C C. A claimant seeking recovery for bad debt shall deduct the debt on the return for the period during which the bad debt is written off as uncollectable in that claimant s books and records and is eligible to be deducted for federal income tax purposes.... D. If a claimant takes a deduction for bad debt, and the debt is subsequently collected in whole or in part.... E. If the amount of bad debt exceeds the amount of taxable sales for the period during which the bad debt is written off, the claimant may file a refund claim with the commissioner in accordance with 32 V.S.A

3 ... G.... If the claimant s books and records support an allocation of bad debts among several states, the commissioner shall allow the allocation. Vermont Sales and Use Tax Regulations Both regulations apply here due to the timing of the underlying events of these cases. Facts Each of these cases proceeded to the Commissioner on stipulated facts. Citibank entered into consumer credit agreements with certain Vermont retailers, including Sears, and their customers, providing those customers with credit cards to finance purchases from the retailers. When the customer charges a purchase, Citibank pays the retailer the amount charged the sale amount plus any sales tax. The retailer reports its taxable sales to the Department and pays the sales tax. If a customer defaults on the credit card account with Citibank, Citibank eventually charges off the account balance as worthless debt in accordance with Section 166 of the Internal Revenue Code. Citibank not the retailer takes the loss. Citibank is the sole owner of the credit card account. The retailer, such as Sears, does not extend credit to the customer and is not responsible for losses on defaulted accounts. Citibank sought sales tax refunds from the Department pursuant to 32 V.S.A in an amount corresponding to the value of sales tax included in relevant defaulted credit card accounts for periods from February 2004 through June The refund requests were denied and the administrative appeals consolidated into one case. Sears sales and use tax returns for periods from June 2004 through May 2007 were audited by the Department. It was found to have deducted from its taxable sales (thus lowering its sales tax obligation) the amount of debt that Sears customers defaulted on with Citibank. The Department disallowed those deductions and assessed sales tax owed. Citibank and Sears both argued to the Commissioner that since they act together with the consumer in completing the sale that generates the sales tax, they should be considered in combination to satisfy the requirements of the regulations. The Commissioner rejected this argument on numerous bases, including the plain language of the regulations. Standard The court reviews this case on the basis of the record established before the Commissioner. Piche v. Dep t of Taxes, 152 Vt. 229, 233 (1989) (citing State Dep t of Taxes v. Tri-State Indus. Laundries, Inc., 138 Vt. 292, 294 (1980)). The Commissioner s decision is presumed correct, valid and reasonable, absent a clear and convincing showing to the contrary. Tri-State Indus. Laundries, 138 Vt. at Citibank s refund requests relate to private label credit card programs it had with Vermont retailers, not just Sears. 3

4 Applicability of the exclusion Both regulations plainly contemplate that the exclusion applies only to one who is both (1) required to collect the sales tax and (2) who actually suffers the loss associated with the uncollectible debt. Under the arrangement between Sears (and other retailers) and Citibank, the retailer as the seller is required to collect the sales tax, whereas the obligation to suffer the losses on defaulted, financed sales falls to Citibank. Thus, neither Sears nor Citibank is entitled to relief pursuant to 32 V.S.A. 9780, since neither meets both requirements. Sears and Citibank argue that in combination they do satisfy the requirements of Each regulation applies to a vendor or seller or person required to collect [the sales and use] tax. Person is defined by statute to mean an individual, partnership, society, association, joint stock company, corporation, public corporation or public authority estate, receiver..., and any combination of the foregoing. 32 V.S.A. 9701(1). Sears and Citibank, they argue, are acting in combination with each other for purposes of the underlying consumer transaction and for purposes of 32 V.S.A They argue that the effect of their combination is the same as if a store allowed its customers to have credit accounts directly with the store and charge purchases for later payment. Under the regulations, if the customer never paid the store account, the retailer would be able to have the benefit of the exclusion, since it had already remitted the tax to the Department of Taxes but never collected for it. Sears and Citibank argue that under their arrangement, they are acting in combination to the same end, and either one or the other of them should be entitled to the benefit of the exclusion. They are not acting in combination in any meaningful way, however, insofar as the obligation to collect the sales tax goes. Both regulations apply to persons required to collect the sales tax. By statute, the person required to collect the sales tax means every vendor of taxable tangible personal property or services, every recipient of amusement charges. These terms shall also include any officer or employee of a corporation or other entity or of a dissolved entity who as that officer or employee is under a duty to act for the corporation or entity in complying with any requirement of this chapter. 32 V.S.A. 9701(14). A vendor, generally, is the person who makes the sale. 32 V.S.A. 9701(9). Citibank merely provides financing. It acknowledges that it has no obligation to collect the sales tax. There is no meaningful way to construe it as the vendor or other person required to collect the sales tax. Nothing in the statutory scheme or the language of the regulations implies that an entity that provides financing and otherwise is distinct from the entity making the sale or responsible for collecting the sales tax attains the status of one who is required to collect the tax for purposes of Sears is the person responsible for collecting the sales tax. The exclusion applies, however, only to the person who both is responsible for collecting the sales tax and actually takes the loss. Sears does not take the loss. It is fully paid for the sales that generate losses for 4

5 Citibank. The plain language of the regulations is clear. The exclusion does not apply in these cases. It is unnecessary to evaluate the parties policy arguments or analyze the out of state authority they have assembled. Penalty Sears also argues that the Department abused its discretion in assessing a penalty pursuant to 32 V.S.A. 3202(b)(3) because it did not act in bad faith. The Commissioner is authorized to assess a penalty for the failure to pay taxes as follows: When a taxpayer failed to pay a tax liability imposed by this title... on the date prescribed therefor, then in addition to any interest payable..., the Commissioner may assess and the taxpayer shall then pay a penalty. 32 V.S.A. 3201(b)(3). The Commissioner has separate authority to assess penalties for the negligent failure to pay, the fraudulent failure to pay, and for violations based on illegal activity. Subsection 3201(b)(3) does not say that a penalty is warranted in the case of bad faith or unwarranted in the case of good faith. It authorizes the Commissioner to assess a penalty when there is a failure to pay taxes when they are due. It does not limit that discretion. While the Commissioner may well consider a taxpayer s good or bad faith in deciding whether to impose a penalty, that exercise of discretion leaves little room for review on appeal. Conclusion Neither Citibank nor Sears has made a showing of error sufficient to reverse the Determinations of the Commissioner. ORDER For the foregoing reasons, the Determinations of the Commissioner are affirmed. Dated at Montpelier, Vermont this day of June Mary Miles Teachout, Superior Judge 5

TAXATION OF BANKS AND OTHER FINANCIAL CORPORATIONS 241-1 CHAPTER 241 TAXATION OF BANKS AND OTHER FINANCIAL CORPORATIONS Section 241-1 Definitions 241-1.5 Time of application of tax and other provisions

House Bill 920 (AS PASSED HOUSE AND SENATE) By: Representatives Teasley of the 37 th, Golick of the 40 th, Smith of the 134 th, Carson of the 46 th, Brockway of the 102 nd, and others A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE REVENUE RULING # 11-59 WARNING Revenue rulings are not binding on the Department. This presentation of the ruling in a redacted form is information only. Rulings are made

State of Wisconsin Department of Revenue Important Change The football stadium district tax in Brown County ends on September 30, 2015. Filing Claims for Refund of Sales or Use Tax Includes information

Price v. Teaford, No. S0908-04 CnC (Norton, J., Mar. 23, 2005) [The text of this Vermont trial court opinion is unofficial. It has been reformatted from the original. The accuracy of the text and the accompanying

House Bill 325 (AS PASSED HOUSE AND SENATE) By: Representatives Ehrhart of the 36 th, Casas of the 103 rd, and Dutton of the 166 th A BILL TO BE ENTITLED AN ACT 1 2 3 4 5 6 To amend Titles 20 and 48 of

New York State Department of Taxation and Finance Office of Tax Policy Analysis Technical Services Division STATE OF NEW YORK COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION AND FINANCE ADVISORY OPINION PETITION NO. S050815A

Statutes Fees Who May Incorporate Formation Shareholders Name Filing COMPARISON OF ASPECTS OF CORPORATE LAWS OF NEW YORK, DELAWARE, NEVADA, MARYLAND, AND ALABAMA Purpose Reservation Characteristics Business

THE CITY OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE NOTICE OF RULEMAKING Pursuant to the power vested in me as Commissioner of Finance by sections 389(b) and 1043 and 1504 of the New York New York City Charter,

45.241 Definitions -- State agencies and Court of Justice to develop inventory of each debt -- Liquidated debts of agency, Court of Justice, or local government submitted to Department of Revenue -- Accounting

CHAPTER 57-34 TELECOMMUNICATIONS CARRIERS TAXATION 57-34-01. Definitions. The definitions in this section may not be construed to subject a telecommunications carrier or telecommunications service to the

When Is a Partner a Partner For New York Tax Purposes? by Peter L. Faber Peter L. Faber is a partner with McDermott Will & Emery LLP, New York. A New York administrative law judge has held that a lawyer

HOUSE BILL 2427 By Sargent AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 56; Title 62 and Title 66, to enact the Unclaimed Life Insurance Benefits Act". BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE

CHAPTER 57-22 COLLECTION OF DELINQUENT PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES 57-22-01. Treasurer to give notice. The county treasurer, during the month of January preceding the time when personal property taxes shall

CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION APPEALS DIVISION BOARD HEARING SUMMARY In the Matter of the Claim for Refund Under the Sales and Use Tax Law of: ARTURO ROJAS CASTANEDA, dba Barranca Motors Claimant

Regular Session, HOUSE BILL NO. BY REPRESENTATIVE CROMER INSURANCE/LIFE: Provides relative to unclaimed life insurance benefits AN ACT To enact Subpart A- of Part II of Chapter of Title of the Louisiana

ORDER PO-3571 Appeal PA15-24 Ministry of Community and Social Services January 28, 2016 Summary: The ministry received a correction request from the appellant requesting that the ministry correct a 2010

Article 15. Foreign Corporations. Part 1. Certificate of Authority. 55-15-01. Authority to transact business required. (a) A foreign corporation may not transact business in this State until it obtains

Article 21. Reverse Mortgages. 53-255. Title. This Article shall be known and may be cited as the Reverse Mortgage Act. (1991, c. 546, s. 1; 1995, c. 115, s. 1.) 53-256. Purpose. It is the intent of the

Part III Administrative, Procedural, and Miscellaneous Compliance Resolution Program for Employees Other than Corporate Insiders for Additional 2006 Taxes Arising Under 409A due to the Exercise of Stock

PURSUANT TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 7463(b),THIS OPINION MAY NOT BE TREATED AS PRECEDENT FOR ANY OTHER CASE. T.C. Summary Opinion 2014-18 UNITED STATES TAX COURT THOMAS WESLEY ALEXANDER AND SYLVIA

MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res

NOTICE Decision filed 10/15/15. The text of this decision may be changed or corrected prior to the filing of a Petition for Rehearing or the disposition of the same. 2015 IL App (5th 140227-U NO. 5-14-0227

Part III Administrative, Procedural, and Miscellaneous Claims Submitted to the IRS Whistleblower Office under Section 7623 Notice 2008-4 SECTION 1. PURPOSE This Notice provides guidance to the public on

BEFORE THE HEARING OFFICER OF THE TAXATION AND REVENUE DEPARTMENT OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO IN THE MATTER OF THE PROTEST OF DLORAH, INC. d/b/a NATIONAL AMERICAN UNIVERSITY No. 02-31 ID NO. 02-180159-00

South Gross Dakota Receipts Department of Revenue 445 East Capitol Avenue Pierre, South Dakota 57501 This fact sheet is designed to provide general guidelines and examples of what is included in a retailer

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION SECTION OF TAXATION REPORT TO THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES RESOLUTION 1 RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association adopts the Model Transactional Tax Overpayment Act, dated February

NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE. IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION

MODEL LAW ON MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTION BY INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS AND SELF INSPECTORS Section 1. Definitions.-- As used in this act, the term: (1) "Contractor" means any person, corporation, or partnership

PART ONE PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE (60 minutes) ANSWER THE QUESTIONS IN THIS PART OF THE EXAMINATION IN ANSWER BOOK/S SEPARATE FROM THE ANSWER BOOK/S CONTAINING ANSWERS TO OTHER PARTS OF THE EXAMINATION Question

DESCRIPTION OF THE PLAN PURPOSE 1. What is the purpose of the Plan? The purpose of the Plan is to provide eligible record owners of common stock of the Company with a simple and convenient means of investing

BILLING & COLLECTIONS SERVICES STATEMENT OF GENERALLY AVAILABLE TERMS AND CONDITIONS Description of Service This Statement of Generally Available Terms and Conditions ( Statement ) provides details under

Source: http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/tncode/ 47-30-101. Short title. This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Home Equity Conversion Mortgage Act." HISTORY: Acts 1993, ch. 410, 2. 47-30-102.

DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATION Division of Finance and Procurement ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE COLLECTIONS 1 CCR 101-6 [Editor s Notes follow the text of the rules at the end of this CCR Document.]

Article 14. Dissolution. Part 1. Voluntary Dissolution. 55-14-01. Dissolution by incorporators or directors. (a) The board of directors or, if the corporation has no directors, a majority of the incorporators

BELIZE LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ACT CHAPTER 258 REVISED EDITION 2003 SHOWING THE SUBSTANTIVE LAWS AS AT 31ST MAY, 2003 This is a revised edition of the Substantive Laws, prepared by the Law Revision